- From: CSS Meeting Bot via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2022 17:18:08 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
The CSS Working Group just discussed `[css-ui-4] Define how to compute the kind of widget to use for an element`. <details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary> <emeyer> Topic: [css-ui-4] Define how to compute the kind of widget to use for an element<br> <emeyer> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/pull/6537<br> <emeyer> florian: I reviewed this a while back. No issue with the specifics; issue with the overall approach.<br> <emeyer> …Overall, I think it’s odd to have a CSS spec define every type of HTML widget.<br> <emeyer> …The definition of a text field is “a one-line input that looks like a text field”. That’s almost tautological.<br> <emeyer> …Definitions of inputs should be over in the HTML spec. I think we should define widgets that define like foo, those that act like blah.<br> <emeyer> …If we think this is the right approach, the text content is fine. But I don’t think this is the right approach.<br> <emeyer> zcorpan: I co-authored this. I hear two things. One: the algorithm should refactor so it doesn’t repeat. Two: the definitions are vague.<br> <emeyer> …If the WG thinks descriptions of rendering should be in HTML, that’s fine with me.<br> <emeyer> florian: The way they look is tied to how they behave and what they do. All these are sort of kind of replaced elements, but they seem outside of the scope of what CSS controls, in terms of both appearance anad behavior.<br> <emeyer> …If we want to specify their appearance in detail and think the specifics of that should be in CSS, I see why you want it here.<br> <emeyer> …Do we expect that this would define how things would look in not-HTML languages? That seems odd.<br> <emeyer> zcorpan: For the applicability of other languages, I see that as hypothetical.<br> <emeyer> florian: You can style plain XML with CSS.<br> <emeyer> zcorpan: I don’t see why someone would want to invent a new language that recycles stuff from HTML.<br> <emeyer> florian: I stand by my original position, but I feel less strongly about it.<br> <emeyer> …This seems like it touches on OpenUI and what they plan to do.<br> <emeyer> astearns: Any other opinions?<br> <emeyer> …Florian and Simon, do you think we can resolve on this today, or should we pull in others?<br> <emeyer> florian: I think refactoring is good, we can at least do that. We should also talk with Greg [Whitworth].<br> <bkardell_> there is open agenda space in the openui call - suggest you add it?<br> <emeyer> zcorpan: I don’t think it’s super urgent at this point.<br> <emeyer> florian: This has helped me progress. We’ll get back to this later?<br> <bkardell_> there is a call tomorrow<br> <emeyer> astearns: We’ll take this back to the PR and the issue and see what we can do there.<br> </details> -- GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/pull/6537#issuecomment-1022415676 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Wednesday, 26 January 2022 17:18:10 UTC